[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The GreatViews expressed here are not necessarily the views & opinions of ActivistChat.com. Comments are unmoderated. Abusive remarks may be deleted. ActivistChat.com retains the rights to all content/IP info in in this forum and may re-post content elsewhere.

Iranian President Ahmadi Nezhad has been busy putting together a cabinet for the Islamic republic, and while all real power remains firmly in the clammy hands of Supreme Leader Khamenei, it's worth taking a look at some of the new ministers, if only because it tells us two important things: (1) The face the regime wishes to show to the world at large, and (2) the policies the regime intends to unleash on the long-suffering Iranian people.

Who's Who
Let's start with the interior minister, Hojatoll-Islam Mostafa Pour-Mohammadi. He was formerly the number-two man in the ministry of intelligence and security ó where he was directly in charge of the foreign section (and thus the sorts of foreign operations now running full bore in Iraq and Afghanistan) ó and, even more significantly, the man in charge of those matters in the office of the supreme leader.

Pour-Mohammadi comes from a sartorially celebrated family; his father and brother are tailors for leading clergy. Indeed, they prepared the raiments for both bin Laden and Zawahiri in their recent videos, in which their clothing was distinctively Iranian.

The minister for intelligence and security is Hojjatol-Islam Gholam-Hossein Mohseni Ezhei, from Isfahan, where he acquired a reputation as a particularly vicious and barbaric head of the Islamic tribunals which regularly issued brutal sentences. He has been special prosecutor in the intelligence ministry, where he was also in charge of key personnel decisions, and at present he is judge and prosecutor for the special tribunal of the clergy.

To Mohammed-Hossein Saffar-Harandi of Tehran goes the ironically named ministry of culture and Islamic guidance. In reality, that ministry's key role is to provide cover for external intelligence operations. For a decade, Saffar-Harandi was the director of the political bureau of the Revolutionary Guards, in which he holds the rank of brigadier general, and for which he was the commander of southern Iran.

The foreign minister is Manoucher Mottaki, whose long diplomatic career (he has been ambassador to both Japan and Turkey, and deputy foreign minister) has included the sensitive role as liaison between the foreign ministry and the revolutionary guards. While he was ambassador to Ankara, numerous Iranian dissidents were murdered and others kidnapped.

And then there is the defense minister, Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar, another brigadier general in the revolutionary Guards, where he has been since its official formation in 1979. As several commentators have pointed out, he was the commander of the RG forces in Lebanon in 1983, when the Marine barracks were blown up by the Guards and Hezbollah. So we owe him one.

The mullahs have torn off their conciliatory mask in order to bare their fangs to us, the Europeans, and the Iranian people. If we had an Iran strategy worthy of the name, our confused leaders would have pointed out the remarkable interview with the chief nuclear affairs negotiator, Hossein Musavian. It was broadcast on Iranian television August 4th, and made it quite clear that the Iranians deliberately tricked the Europeans into giving the mullahs an extra year to complete a vital part of their nuclear program in Isfahan.

"Thanks to the negotiations with Europe," he bragged, "we gained another year, in which we completed...Isfahan." This was quite a coup, at least in Musavian's humble opinion: "We suspended (the enrichment program) in Isfahan in October 2004, although we were required to do so in October 2003...Today we are in a position of power: (the program) in Isfahan is complete and UF4 and UF6 gases are being produced. We have a stockpile of products, and...we have managed to convert 36 tons of yellow cake into gas and store it..."

President Chirac? Chancellor Schroeder? Prime Minister Blair? How do you all intend to answer your parliamentary inquiries? You were all gulled by the mullahs (or, to put the darkest light on the matter, willing accomplices).

Meanwhile, the mullahs are killing us. Time published a long report from Baghdad on August 14, entitled "Inside Iran's Secret War for Iraq," which lays out chapter and verse of the mullahs' longstanding efforts ó often coordinated with Assad's Syria ó to drive us out of Iraq. It is the first time I've seen a major publication confirm what I reported months before Operation Iraqi Freedom: planning for the terror war against Coalition forces in Iraq "began before the U.S. invaded." And Time quotes a "British military intelligence officer about the relative inattention paid to the murderous Iranian activities. 'It's as though we are sleepwalking'."

Got Iran Policy?
Instead of devoting hours of prime time coverage to the ravings of a broken mother, our media would do better to ask this administration why, four years after 9/11, it still has no Iran policy.

Perhaps, although one cannot say more than that, we are paying more attention. First came the announcement that American forces in Iraq found a cache of Iranian weapons, and had also captured a truck with shaped explosives entering Iraq from Iran. Then, talking to journalists on his plane during a South American swing on August 17, Rumsfeld said that U.S. forces have found Iranian weapons in Iraq "on more than one occasion over the past couple of months."

And so? These are straws in a very strong wind, and they will be blown away unless President Bush, Secretaries Rice and Rumsfeld, and Security Adviser Hadley at long last craft a serious policy to bring the terror war to bear on Tehran, as the president should have demanded on 9/12. The list of proven Iranian actions in the terror war against us is a very long one. To take just a few: In July, Assistant Secretary of State David Welch testified to the House International Relations Committee that "Iranian cadre were training Hizballah fighters in Lebanon," which Representative Tom Lantos quite reasonably found "profoundly disturbing." Hezbollah is operating in Iraq, and its infamous operational chieftain, Imad Mughniyah, remains at large even though the US Government has put a very high price on his head for decades. U.S. special forces in Hilla last fall captured documents and photographs of known Iraqi terrorists meeting with Syrian and Iranian intelligence officers in Syria. The celebrated Spanish magistrate Baltasar Garzon publicly stated that, after the liberation of Afghanistan, al Qaeda reconstituted its leadership in Iran, where they convened a strategic summit in November, 2002. One of the participants was a Syrian named Mustafa Setmariam Nasar, who is now suspected by British authorities of being one of the masterminds of the lethal terrorist attack in London. According to Spanish newspapers, "Intelligence reports from foreign agencies last year placed Nasar in Iran."

The seemingly inescapable fact is that Iran is waging war on us, we are well aware of it, and we are not responding, even though most Iranians are dreaming of the day that the United States supports them against the mullahs. Hardly a day goes by without anti-regime demonstrations in one Iranian city or another, involving students, workers, intellectuals, and even some very important clergymen. The number of Iranian dissidents on hunger strike is growing. Akbar Ganji hovers between life and death in a hospital in Tehran. Yet, aside from occasional statements of compassion, there is no hint of action from the Bush administration.

This inaction has recently been buttressed by two fanciful "estimates" from the intelligence community. The first reassuringly forecast that Iran is a good ten years away from nuclear weapons; the second insisted that no revolution is in the Iranian works. To which the only proper response is a belly laugh. I'm personally willing to bet the farm against any intel-type willing to take the wager that Iran will have atomic bombs in a period closer to ten days than to ten years. And the "no revolution in the works" prediction comes, as Eli Lake of the splendid New York Sun wrote yesterday, from the same people who made the same prediction just before the fall of the Shah and who confidently told Ronald Reagan that the Soviet Empire was here to stay. Somebody should ask the deep thinkers to name three revolutions that occurred without outside support, and when they fail, they should then be asked how they could make such an assessment without discussing the key variable: our support or lack thereof.

As if that were not enough, our expert community, in and out of government, incessantly warns that if we were to support the democratic opposition in Iran, it would actually hurt the chances of revolution, because the Iranians would be so angry they would rally around the mullahs in a blind nationalistic spasm. The deep thinkers should take a look at the mullahs' reaction to the ongoing revolt in Awaz, in Khuzistan province. The regime has blamed the whole thing on the British Government. This produced a memorable response from the British Ahwazi friendship society:

Protestors are armed with rocks, tyres and anything else they can use in acts of civil disobedience. They do not have guns. Is Asefi afraid the British are smuggling rocks into Iran to overthrow the Revolutionary Guards? Does he think Ahwazis need special training from the British in order to throw rocks?

The mullahs always blame their troubles on foreigners, and yet the Iranian people remain opposed to the regime, and many of the most popular dissidents openly ask the West, and particularly the United States, to help them.

Well, Mr. President? To use the language of one of your favorite games, it's time to call or fold. Indeed, if you're planning to stay at the table, you might even raise: President Ahmadi Nezhad was not in the American embassy in Tehran in 1979, but he was hard at work in Evin Prison, where some of the hostages were interrogated. You've got every good reason to tell him to forget about coming to New York this fall to pose at the U.N. That would send a ripple of hope through the Iranian populace, now interpreting our willingness to let him come here as a sign of acquiescence. And while you're at it, why don't you ask the Europeans to show at least some symbolic courage. They've failed to stem the Iranian nuclear program. It's obviously a wasted effort to ask the U.N. to apply sanctions, since China and/or Russia will quash it (and in fact, sanctions are the last thing we should want, since they would punish the Iranian people, not the beturbaned tyrants in power). Put the mark of Cain on the mullahs: propose that the Europeans to join with you in asking for a ban of Iran from all international athletic competition. And ask the international trade union organizations to support their brothers and sisters in Iran, many of whom have not been paid for months, despite the cascade of petrodollars.

Enough already. Let's roll.

Last edited by cyrus on Mon Aug 29, 2005 12:05 am; edited 1 time in total

The Iranian American community should put together the biggest ever protest action when Antari Nejad comes to the US/UN!

RP should also attend alongside all other groups at this protest action!

As for Ledeens' comments:

Quote:

Instead of devoting hours of prime time coverage to the ravings of a broken mother, our media would do better to ask this administration why, four years after 9/11, it still has no Iran policy.

In view of the fact that the head of the current administration is taking a one month vacation, obviously the media is following suit as well. 'Ravings of a broken mother' is a cheap shot from Ledeen, and unnecessary. This adminsitration has been asleep at the wheel with Iran for many years now, and things have gotten way out of hand as a result. I doubt if this adminsitration will do anything.

The Iranian American community should put together the biggest ever protest action when Antari Nejad comes to the US/UN!

RP should also attend alongside all other groups at this protest action!

why? so we can make a fool of ourselves in front of the world while U.S officials & world leaders shake hands with mr. ahmadinezhad and welcome him to the UNITED GOVERNMENTS HQ?

once upon a time the best youth of Iran set themselves on fire to protest such thugs and terrorists coming to U.S.

they're long gone and even if we all set ourselves on fire, U.S officials will do what they were going to do all along.

for 25 years, U.S put up with IRI just so EU could rebuild its economy. this agreement once signed and sealed in french island, seems to be renewed for another 25 years. now you can tear it up or tear yourselves apart, but it wont change anything!

why do we keep forgetting that without U.S help, ayatollahs would not be in power today, only on EU plot alone.

this guy is their own thug.

as long as guys like him rule Iran, west doesn't have to worry about how to aquire cheap crude oil.

if they can shake hands with the like of Saddam, why not ahmadinejad?

afterall, he didn't kill as many - YET! _ so still got a long way to go!

if not him, who will keep the Iranians' mouth shut, while the country is plundered and looted? can blair or chirac send an arrest warrant for the protesters? hang the activists? keep the women under chador and suppressed? keep the youth drugged and destroy our culture/ herritage and resources? NO!

so you see why ahmadinejad has to be there!

it's important for world politics that people like him be always there and ready to terrorise, Kill and Suppress for the sake of "islam"!!!

give the guy a break. he's just a thug. why shoot the messenger?

grab the big shot basterds of Real Politic by the neck, for a change!_________________Paayande Iran

Last edited by Liberty Now ! on Sat Aug 27, 2005 2:04 am; edited 8 times in total

The US is required by the UN treaty to admit visiting diplomatic delegations, no matter how obnoxious the individuals within them (such as Castro). Many New Yorkers would be very happy to move the UN to Paris or some other place, since the UN diplo's use their immunity to flout local parking rules. So don't read too much into A-M coming into New York; Liberty, why not do something to help organize the counter-demonstration?

Committee Formed to Protest the September Trip of Iran's President Ahmadinejad to New York City

NEW YORK, August 26 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The 'New York Committee against Ahmadinejad (NYCA)' announces its formation. Its mission is to campaign against the trip by
Iran's new President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to New York City, scheduled for mid-September. He is planning to address the upcoming
United Nations General Assembly session.

Twenty-six years ago, a group of fundamentalist Iranian students occupied the US Embassy in Tehran and held some 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. Soon after, Iran's ruling regime began networking with, organizing, and funding terrorist outfits across the world. This global terrorist network has murdered dozens of Iranian dissidents abroad and many foreign nationals, including hundreds of US citizens. The terror bombings in Beirut, Saudi Arabia and Argentina are just a few examples of the Iran- sponsored deadly terrorist attacks.

Recent media reports indicate that the insurgents in
Iraq receive their training, sanctuary, and weapons from Iran. Inside Iran, human rights violations have worsened. At least 53 individuals, including seven minors and three women, have been hanged or sentenced to death since Ahmadinejad became President in late June.

Ahmadinejad, a leader of the group that took over the US embassy in 1979, is scheduled to arrive in New York on September 14th. His entourage would consist of individuals with a similar track record in terrorism.

Iranian regime, the most active state sponsor of global terrorism, is now on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons. Ahmadinejad has already expressed his determination to pursue nuclear arms. Those who took US citizens hostage 26 years ago are now emboldened by our silence and are now coming to New York City. We have our chance to raise our voice against the presence of these terrorists and murderers in our city for the sake of peace, justice and security.

On Tuesday August 30, 2005, 'New York Committee against Ahmadinejad (NYCA)' will host a press conference where issue experts will highlight the NYCA's views concerning Ahmadinejad's trip to the United States.

I'm more interested in doing what I can to help the people of Iran overthrow the criminals that control Iran, than I am in hurling abuse at the countries and governments that can help the most in accomplishing that end. Some others on this board seem to have different priorities, for what reason I do not know. As for your implication that I know of some pro-mullah demonstration in New York, thats taking your conspiracy minded-ness a bit too far._________________The Sun Is Rising In The West!Soon It Will Shine on All of Iran!

I'm more interested in doing what I can to help the people of Iran overthrow the criminals that control Iran, than I am in hurling abuse at the countries and governments that can help the most in accomplishing that end. Some others on this board seem to have different priorities, for what reason I do not know.

---------------

Dear Rasker,

Indeed...and you folks need all the help you can get from not just the free nations of the world, but of individuals who stand with you in your aspirations of freedom and hope for a future.

Often I have seen those on various forums who try to drive a wedge between the Iranian opposition and those of us not from Iran who recognise and support those aspirations.

It may be that Liberty's anger is misplaced, but then again, I have seen too many parallels with other posts on various forums to believe this individual is a true son of Iran.

(from SMCCDI's letter to president Bush)

[Mr. President, We believe the minor problems resulting
in splits among opposition groups can be resolved by your
eloquent inaugural speech and your continued moral and
logistical support. Now is the time for us to come together
and face the dangers.

Not the least of which is the danger that the opposition
movement itself faces from regime elements located all over
the world. In much the same way Saddam targeted his
opposition, we face those same threats, both physically and
politically at home and abroad by the following methodology
of the Islamic Republic regime:
Distract, Deceive, Discredit, Discourage, and Dismember the
opposition, wherever it may be found. How these methods
manifest itself in action, is varied, effective, and
coordinated by the theocratic regime through it's agents,
and proxy. Including targeted assassinations on our future
leaders.]

------------

Liberty's stated intent.....

"I'm not gonna throw anything at ahmadinejad, but those U.S/ EU politicians who shake hands with him ! "

...Is in effect not just wrong-thinking...or wrong action as intended...but serves to discredit himself as a member of the opposition....and perhaps an attempt to discredit this forum by posting veiled threat against US and allied diplomats.

Note: Ahmadinejad's visa has not yet been approved at this time, and the investigation into his past is still underway by the US and other nations.

As host nation to the UN, yes we have certain responsibilities to the UN, and all member states to provide access, and security to representitives and heads of state.

This particular issue is not comparable with Castro, Arafat, or any previous instance where questions have arisen.

Member states are obligated to waive immunity in cases where criminal activity by its representitives are involved, nor can the UN serve as "sanctuary" if due process of serving a criminal complaint is in order.

Should the investigation warrant criminal prosecution, I believe there is in place the legal bylaws of the US/UN agreements under host nation affairs to not simply refuse visa, but to serve a warrant for arrest, and place any representitive (head of state included) in custody.

Whether that be done by the "blue helmets" in the UN itself, or by US officials outside UN grounds.

It's a hell of a situation, and there really is no precedent that is comparable in exactness. I think you can imagine what would transpire.

But I am curious as to how you would gage the effect, not only on the opposition, but in terms of any retaliation by the IRI if he was taken into custody.

I'm not sure arresting A-M would advance the ultimate end, liberating the seventy million hostages and their country. After all, he's more or less a powerless puppet of Khamenei and could easily be replaced. And I can imagine the firestorm from all the UN diplos and heads of state who might easily imagine themselves in the same situation. That might hurt any chances of getting regime-shaking sanctions thru the security council, which is the most useful role I can imagine the UN playing in this crisis.

My solution would be to have him speak to the UN remotely, from beyond the 12 mile limit at sea, from a garbage barge where New York City dumps its refuse.

I am thinking that the Bush administration will make findings about A-M in a detailed manner so as to gain maximum publicity, but in the end will allow him to enter and speak. I think they know what they're doing - the EU3 negotiations were allowed to proceed and are appearing to bring the EU3 over to the sanctions side now. It's just a question in my mind of how much time we have before the US or Israel must take precipitate unilateral or multilateral military action._________________The Sun Is Rising In The West!Soon It Will Shine on All of Iran!

MMMmmm, ah yes...then I suppose he'll be declaring himself the duly elected "Lord of the Flies"....(thanks for the belly laugh)...

But on a serious note....I think there's been a bit of a power shift...traditionally you'd be right...but the Mullahs have been on life support, and its the Rev. Guard that is the machine keeping them alive.

Whereas it has been a simbiotic relationship, there has been a shift, to the effect that now the mullahs and the Ayatollah are the puppets on strings...

a soft-sell military coup de etat just happened.....

If you don't believe me, his cabinet offers proof positive.

As well, I doubt if his arrest would be a singular event...it would be in conjunction with a motion to remove the regime from the UN general Assembly altogether, by two-thirds majority vote of the membership, along with Sec. Council deliberations on sanctions (with or without IAEA referral).

The IRI presents a comprehensive "test case" for UN reform in every conceivable way.

And yeah it may shake up a few folks in the UN, but that might not be a bad thing if it causes others to get their act together in accordance with the UN charter.

I'm mostly concerned with whether the IRI would consider it an act of war....even sanctions....regardless if there was basis or not...which there wouldn't be...as member...Iran must recognise the UN's legal rulings..

As for the opposition, they've wanted the international community to get down to buisiness for a long while now....I'd think there'd be dancing in the streets....and a loss of fear on the Iranian people's part to effect change.

Just my guess, and I'm hoping it would stun the regime to the point that by the time they reacted, the people would be on the mullah's doorstep...with battering rams.

Just because it hasn't been done before doesn't mean it can't be...the legal framework exists, and has for as long as the UN was founded.